I studied history at University, and came out knowing quite a lot about the French Revolution, Italian and German Unification, the Industrial Revolution. Not much else. The earlier British history I knew really I learned when I was 11, 12, 13, 14. Listening to these podcasts has inspired me to do more reading, and - in retirement - some of the gaps are beginning to fill in. And it's a beautiful feeling when you realise that Ferdinand and Isabella (of Columbus fame) were the parents of Catherine of Aragon, and so the grandparents of Mary I. One day I may even be able to understand what the Holy Roman Empire was. I think one of the hardest things for a person brought up in a modern nation state (particularly from the UK which is geographically distinct) to understand, is how fluid populations could be. So the Lombards coming from Germany, the Vandals coming from Germany and occupying North Africa, the Normans being refurbished Vikings - it makes us queasy. It's easier to deal with one country at a time. The good thing about following the Rest is History wherever it leads, is that it helps to break down the unease about the complexity of European history. And the more one learns, the easier it becomes to learn more.
Dominic/Tom - You seemed beside yourselves that Luther referred to the giving of alms as menstrual waste but this hyperbole, I believe he was borrowing from the prophet Isaiah who states (in 64:6) that we are all unclean and our righteous acts are as filthy rags. Biblical scholars aver that in this context Isaiah is referring to cloth used for female hygiene, as a woman was considered ceremonially unclean to participate in religious events during her monthly cycle per Levitical Law. So, I would assert Luther's hyperbolic statements are merely him paraphrasing holy scriptures as part of his argument against the concept of works-based salvation.
As a Greek Orthodox Christian I have so enjoyed these sessions. Absolutely brilliant and presented with genius. And of course we orthodox have been saying some of this since the late middle ages and dawning schism. Of course we see Luther in error ( unbalanced better put) with his seeing the human being as fundamentally evil with all the negatively psychological following " hang ups" this brings. We would say human beings have the possibility of good and evil and the Christian life consists in that struggle as history clearly shows. Equally we pray for the dead but the rest is up to God's mercy.
Orthodoxy could do with a little less conflagration with civil authorities. But as something encroached to Eastern Europe, It has become irrelevant. However, thanks to soviet conservatism It Will crumble a bit later than Roman Catolicismo.
Tom Holland here with an endearingly camp take on the already quintessentially camp Martin Luther, brilliantly counterpoised by the effusive and bubbly Mr Sandbrook. All good clean honest-to-God fun... Keep up the good work chaps.
I don’t know how I found this channel but I’m so glad I did! I love this channel. Please keep having these conversations! Perhaps something on the “Dark Ages”?
Would there be a chance you could ever do a series on piracy. Maybe go through the early stages of piracy in the Caribbean and then to the golden age and then to the eventual fall of the golden age. I think it would be so interesting to hear you talk about.
You guys are so great! But could you please number the youtube videos like you do the podcasts so it's easier to find them (and make sure you're listening in sequence for a series)?
One area where I'd disagree with Dominic Sandbrook is that Luther's position on the Bible being innately clarifying was absurd. From our perspective in the 21st century it is, yes, but from the perspective of a believing Christian in the 16th century that takes an omnipotent God who has written his word through his agents on Earth then it doesn't seem absurd to think that he set it up in such a way as its texts would automatically illumine our minds upon reading it given God's power. It is the same thought as to how the scholastics such as Aquinas thought huge tracts of Christian theological principles could be ascertained by pure logic and Aristotelian metaphysics. Yes, to a 21st century person it seems absurd but to someone who takes it for granted that there was an omnipotent deity that has ordered the universe then the fact he could set it up in such a way that the human mind (which he also created) could comprehend it seems a perfectly reasonable assumption. I think Sandbrook sees religion in institutional terms - notevhis doubt about whether people actually thought the relics were true - as a form of Burkean conservative glue, and whilst it was that, people did actually genuinely assume its principles in a visceral way that makes the events of these eras impossible to understand otherwise.
Discussing the history of the church without possessing the faith and a deep understanding of scripture can present things from a different light but not necessarily the right perspective from a believer standpoint. Having said that, I’m loving this podcast as well. 😊
@@thelazychefuk4410 We study something to come to believe in it. We have to have faith that what is told is the truth. Not everything in history is verifiable. If we study something and don't believe in it, then whats the point?
Dominic's idea that those who are saved are morally superior to others is completely back-to-front to the reality experienced by true Christians. The joy of grace that Luther experienced was not because he felt more moral, but that he realised his desperate wickedness but that despite it all, the sacrifice of Christ was sufficient to forgive him both legally and efficaciously. Oh, glorious day, when Jesus washed my sins away! My own experience confirms this view.
@@joejohnson6327 no friend, that is a misunderstanding of the nature of intellectual discourses of those times. Luther was no worse than any other. He just stood firm on the truth of God's conviction on his heart and mind, something very rare in modern Christendom.
you do understand the inherent self-contradiction of your statement? the "no true scottsman"argument while espousing your own moral superiority as a "true christian"
Do you not know that Jesus Christ is IN you. Luther realized who he was that the grace given by God was himself. Your own wonderful human Imagination is God. Luther Experienced the Scriptures as they are truly written. It is not secular history but Sacred history. It is the story of everyman. Every character in the Bible is a State of Conciousness... not a person that walked the earth 2000 years ago. If you think Jesus is out there somewhere then you do not understand the Bible. Jesus is the pattern man. When you awaken from this deadly sleep to who you really are (God) all Imagination you will read the Bible differently. But you must also begin to understand the true meaning of the words and names used. The Bible is written so that the ignorant and abusers would not comprehend its deep meaning. You don't have to be a monk to be close to God. God is closer than breathing nearer than hands and feet. What is that? Your own Imagination. Without it nothing exists.
Two comments: burning books was first mentioned in the Acts of the apostles in the New testament. Secondly, comparing good works to menstrual filth is a biblical reference to Isaiah 64:6.
I tried several times to get the survey but failed. Maybe because not a member, listen on Spotify. If you're reading this can I please make 2 suggestions? A history of the Spanish Civil War and the history of Cuba. I loved the series on Cortez and on Columbus. Brilliant!!
It is more important for Christians now than ever before to study the Bible, science, history, psychology, etc., to understand the universe and our place in the Christian kingdom. Otherwise, individuals can interpret the Bible strangely and establish cults, which is happening (happened) in the USA
It starts with courtious debates and propaganda battles. But if anyone told Luther and the bishop how catholic vs protestant "debate" will look like in Germany in 100 years, during the Thirty Year War, everyone would have second thoughts in whether splitting the Church is a good idea or not.
Perhaps the most important principle in engineering is avoiding “single points of failure.” Depending on one monarch for one’s protection would have made me very circumspect!
Some of the insights here are so profound. Pivotal. There is a seriousness to this that is far above the level of hype that is creeping into the podcast.
When you are called and actually have the Experiences that an Individual has and at some point we will all go through it... you become unafraid of anything literally. We are called One by One. He was Born again.. from above. When you are born again it actually means being born from above ( in your skull). You go through an entire process. The Bible as I have stated is not secular history. It is the story of Salvation. God is sleeping in every man and will awaken. This is what Luther discovered. Everything he says is absolutely true but one has to Experience God to understand.
I wish this podcast had been available to view whilst taking my degree I history. Very knowledgeable and informative. Keep up the fine work guys. PS Any chance of another episode on the 1970s? We have had two so far, on the Heath government and the February 1974 election. Left me in a state of anticipation for more.
To hear them compare Luther's rhetoric and Trump's rhetoric, and finding the comparison valid, is absolutely fascinating and crushingly depressing, at the same time.
Printing was a much more labor intensive and expensive process back at that time. Where did Luther get money or influence in his early days to convince the printers to print his bibles, and his original treatises? Did he have a rich patron? Was there an established circle of like minded individuals that included someone with a printing press who had already been predisposed to the same ideas and just waited for someone with a spark?
I think people are missing the point when they pretend it only takes accepting the love of God to be saved so therefore you can behave as you like cause you have a “get out of jail free” card anytime. It is not that simple and it is a juvenile interpretation which, yes, people throw in Christians’ faces, but it is not true. Loving God and accepting the love of God means you choose to follow God, which means you desire only good. Sin - doing other than God’s will for your life - is soul crushing if you truly love God. Yes sin is always there and we fall- but we do not want it and we fight it. The deeper you ask for and feel the love of God,the stronger you get in resisting sin. It is not always a pleasant task. Accepting the spirit of God in your heart is becoming one with that spirit and letting it guide you- not choosing for your own sinful self. “Born again” means you are well and truly changed and carry God within you. It’s a phrase that has been cheapened by the commercialism of an often lazy human-led church looking for an easier way with shallow promises… Just like Luther’s take on indulgences!! But it is not an easy truth to follow. Certainly churches are full of sinners and error -but we are called to always look for and resist our nature - with the help of God - no matter where we find it. Where else but church should a sinner come? In Corinthians, Paul says: “God catches the wise in their craftiness … do not be deceived, for all is yours… and you are Christ’s and Christ is God’s. “ Of course - these are only my perspectives in faith. Read and see what you find for yourself.
As a lifelong Lutheran I am aghast - Lol; but I agree with Dominic him changing his last name to assimilate Aluthera is quite telling as did another 1960's rebel:/
John 3:3 - Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." 1 Peter 1:23 - For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.
I would love some citations throughout this conversation. Hearing things about Luther placing emphasis on a feeling is odd because Luther talked about looking to the cross for assurance to fight his lack of feeling saved. I would also love to hear this talk with a Lutheran scholar and theologian present to push back on these statements. Dr. Jordan B. Cooper comes to mind.
So is Luther then the father of enlightenment, this Lutherian way of thinking much more individual and truth seeking. A shift in thinking about your own belief and how you preserve God
Johne Locke, Issac Newton, René Descartes big influencers of the Enlightenment but Voltaire is considered by most as the father of the Enlightenment. Could Luther be the father of enlightenment? Well, the Enlightenment was about human reasoning to explain how the world worked and how man could and should interplay in this world whereas Martin Luther still believed that Christ and faith in Christ as savior and God’s workings explained many things about life, nature, and beyond.
Luther was a man and therefore flawed. But he was right about the indulgences. It’s like it all went to his head and he started believing his own PR. Sound like most everyone we ever knew? Doesn’t negate where he started though. The indulgences were corruption plain and simple.
as a fellow cult leader, he'd pretend to have insightful thoughts while just using it to push his usual agenda. It's a pretty standard script across all of them really
@@HomeFromFarAway a fair point, yet I've often found that non-Lutherans emphasis certain parts of Luther's works and thought isolated from the rest. It's especially easy with him because is not systematic so when taken out of context often contradicts himself. A good example is Justification, Luther taught that the Christian is united with Christ by God's declaration, thus he takes our death and sin and we receive His righteousness and life, if we remain in Him (rely on Him, or sola fide). The Luthers I've often found in non-Lutheran academics would struggle to write his catechisms.
Predestination of an elite seems to me a loathsome idea, I am surprised so little is made of that. As a tool of oligarchy it is interesting to contrast it with what is going on today. Back then Luther linked subjectivity and exclusion. Elites today link subjectivity and inclusion. (That driven by Wittgenstein or perhaps his patron Keynes). But anyhow, all attacks on rationality are grist to oligarchical operations. I wonder what Pelagius would have made of Luther? I like to think "unbearable". My own video - looking at money in order to strengthen Gibbon regarding St Augustine & co goes live tonight......
So far I am in a quandry with this video and the portrayal if Luther. This is mainly because I have listened to Lloyd de Jongh on his channel quoting from the works of Luther ( which seem to expose Luther as being rather insane and unsavoury) would welcome some comment on this, or perhaps that is yet to come? ( 27 m into this video now) Apart from that I personally find myself wondering if in the long run Luther's input has virtually destroyed Christianity. I mean this in the light of the emptying and closing churches, is this the result of chaotic doctrines and ultimate free for all, anything goes churches??
Lloyd doesn't seem interested in giving a balanced picture of the views of those he disagrees with. He once did a video on socialism. I commented underneath pointing out that the word is an umbrella term for both marxism and social democracy, rather than just covering marxism and other varieties of communism, and that there is some Christian inspiration for aspects of marxism, and he called me an apologist for genocide. So I think it's likely that Lloyd was quote-mining Luther. That's not to say that Luther didn't have some unsavory views, but those do come later. As for Luther's impact, it's worth noting that Luther didn't believe in chaotic doctrines and free-for-all anything goes churches. The writings of the Reformers draw on the writings of the church fathers just as much as the writings of their Roman Catholic contemporaries. And the fact that Christianity (at least as measured by statisticians) is continuing to grow faster than the global population is due in very large part to Protestant missionary activity in Africa, India, China, and other areas of the world. So it is very much premature to suggest that Protestantism will eventually lead to the virtual destruction of Christianity.
-Having read a bit of 16th century theological works, to me most of the writers appear that way to me. I'm not convinced this is special to Martin Luther.
As a student of cult deprogramming and mental health issues, Luther precisely fits the script for a cult leader. his actions, words and world view are cookie cutter stuff
yes. He is making history accessible to modern day listeners. The channel uses humour. If you feel the channel is just not arch enough for you, I'm sure you will be missed.
The obsession with the movement of the bowels - or its results, rather - still very much is a thing for German speakers to this day. Maybe something that can also be chalked up to Luther who has coined quite a few German proverbs and expressions that are in use to date.
The burning of the bull is defying the church and that is defying God since Christ told Peter "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). He took matters into his own hands and the rest about Protestantism is historically bad for the church. There is a better way to deal with the situation without having to break up the church as far as he is concerned.
So sad that Tom Holland failed to read the most accurate theological/spiritual account of Luther’s journey, the Historical and Theological Introduction (65 pages) of Luther’s MAGNUM OPUS…The Bondage of the Will. “From 1517 onwards, the relationship between Erasmus (the Pope’s ‘hit man,’ hired to intellectually assassinate Luther) and Luther was a matter of great interest and speculation to men of letters, theologians, bishops and princes. As early as 1502 in his ENCHIRIDION Erasmus had declared his distaste for dogmatic theology, and Luther was above all a (radical) theologian.”
I'm Orthodox and speaking only for myself! I consider Luther the prince of heretics as well as being vulgar and someone who placed himself ABOVE the Bible, he wanted some books removed and altered one of St Paul's comments on Faith to change the meaning.
These shows are riddled with pointless personal political options or irrelevant comparisons. They will age like milk as people wont even care about the current political figures. Why not just start a politics podcast and drop the "history" veneer?
I love your podcasts and enjoy hearing your perspective on Luther but you guys need someone whose expertise is theology and Church history to help inform your comments on this because parts of your narrative and some of your claims are inaccurate, and at times even somewhat slanderous.
I find it ludicrous to compare Luther to Peterson who is so pro establishment. Not to say that anti-colonial scholars are actually anti-establishment, but it is still a fresher idea with more mileage in it than lobsters and room-cleaning. History will decide, Peterson is a joker.
Luther's notion of sola fide is a misreading of Paul, contradicts the words of Christ in the Synoptics and John, and inevitably leads to presumption. If Luther was corned about _sola fide_ then how do we make sense of Paul's words elsewhere in his letters: "work out your salvation in fear and trembling"? James clearly contradicts it: "... salvation is not by faith alone". Christ talks about the importance of works over and over again. Luther is just flat out wrong.
The “certitude” of Luther originates from 1) Scripture, primarily the NT and the Apostle Paul (1 Cor. 2:6-16) and 2) the fact of having been born-again (regenerated) by God the Holy Spirit. It takes both to resolve the epistemological questions of TRUTH vs error. 2 Timothy 1:7 “For God did not give us a Spirit of fear but of power and love and A RESOLUTE MIND.” Will Tom Holland see this spiritual/ theological critical axiom?
It is a critical axiom. And it’s becoming more and more critical every day as the Catholic Church seems to be now fully committed to proving Luther correct
I love this series on Luther but all this had been thought of before! By a woman who was burnt at the stake in 1310. All the theology you speak of is right there in Marguerite Porete's book (which survived her death) The Mirror of Simple Souls.
I have watched all of the episodes in this series about Martin Luther and one thing that i have noticed was their constant sniggering at , and taking the piss out of , Luther and other people for the way they spoke and the language they used . I have a question for them both : would they talk and react that way if it was a giant of the world of " peacefulness " that they were discussing ? Would they be laughing and taking the piss like they did in this? And we all know the answer : a massive never in a million years . The question then remains , why not ? What are they afraid of ? Who are they afraid of ? And why ? Where is all their investigatory independance ? Two-tier hypocrisy is not just restricted to the police , politicians and the judiciary . It is alive and absolutely thriving in this series . How discriminatory and unjust .
What Luther is doing is exactly what Adam did and that was to decide for himself what is good and evil outside of church authority I.e. God’s authority. If he did it constructively within the church, it won’t be adversarial, it would have a more positive outcome.
So, selling Indulgences is something a Christian Pastor should be happy about? Should Herr Dr. Luther have pretended he didn't know the basic Christian Faith to please the Pope of Rome? Christianity is a Public Faith and not a Secret Gnostic Faith it's content is known and should be believed and Practiced even if this is frowned upon by the Pope of Rome and his Cardinals and other Officials.
@@adolphCat As I've mentioned, voicing out against something you think is wrong is the right thing to do, but one must not do it by tearing down part of the church and cause disunity. The pope is ordained by God, and he will face God himself, the rest of us must do things with the right conscience for the right purpose without causing schism in the church. This order was instructed by Christ and we must obey both; that is to voice out without having schismatic intention.
@@leoteng1640 It seems your idea is that Herr Dr. Luther and the German Princes should have asked permission of the Pope to outlaw the sale of Indulgences in Germany and if the Pope gave them permission to do this they should have been happy and they should not have much concern if the sale of Indulgences continued in Italy and other places. If the Pope refused to give them permission to abolish the sale of Indulgences in their Territories they should have let the issue go, as a future Pope might give this permission after St. Peter's Basilica was built and finances were doing better and the need for German money was not urgently needed. The most important thing is Church Unity and not submission of the Church in part or as a whole to Christ. Unity and not Obedience to God is the main concern of Christ for the People of God. Unity of the Whole Church is more important than Living a particularly Christian Lifestyle or adapting a deep Christian Spirituality by any part of the Church. University Professors, Theologians, sould forget the Faith they studied all the years and certainly not teach the Laity the Faith if this will cause a rift in Church Unity or bring trouble to policies, finances, or politics of the Pope. Unity is the main Reason for the Church and not reconciliation of sinful Humanity with God or Communion with God in Christ.
Great narrative, pretty shaky theology. Luther didn't want to dismantle the Church, and his ideas weren't as individualistic as you claim. He didn't champion feeling, but rather the objective promise of Scripture. He said you should take comfort in the promise of salvation, but not that your salvation was implicated by the strength of that comfort. He would definitely disagree with the idea that your faith was something to be hashed out between you and God alone.
I wish there could be the equivalent of a modern day Marin Luther who could drive a stake in to the heart of ALL religious lunacy whether christian or Jew or Islam or Hindu or.... As a species we have advanced WAY beyond that type of ignorant, provincial "thinking" that still infects us to this moment.
problem is that cult leaders like luther do exist today. it rarely goes well. My hope is that culture leans more heavily into rationality and we don't just terminate the species via idology
Sorry Tom, sacramental Baptism doesn’t “give” the “new birth.” That was the Catholic DOGMA Luther saw as error. Baptism commemorates the born-again event in a genuine Christian’s experience. Are you drawing on someone’s Anglican/Church of England past?
@@mistymoor7114 The grammatical construction in John 3:3-8 contrast the natural (“flesh”-v.6) and the supernatural, our watery birth from a woman’s womb (v.4) with the supernatural/metaphysical “birth from above or beyond” (vv.3 &7). There is no mention of “baptism” until later, v.22 and this Jewish activity has nothing to do with sacramentalism.
@@karlernstbuddenbrock371 Hardly. CLASSIC would be 2 hours minimum. And what in the world does a short, wealthy tax collector sitting in a tree have to do with ANYTHING in THIS conversation??
Luther didn't know his Bible so well. The book of James says that Faith without works is dead. Also, in the Old Testament Satan is basically an employee or flunky of Yahweh. It isn't until the New Testament that this concept of Satan as an evil being comes into play.
If you read that verse from James in context, it seems to be saying that faith that does not produce works is dead, rather than that faith needs works added to it (it goes on to say that I will show you my faith by my workds). This is perfectly compatible with Luther's theology. He came to regard the book as an epistle of straw because of that passage, but it is an extremely common pattern in church history for a person or movement to react against one (perceived) error by going too far in the opposite direction, and his view on James is an obvious example of this. His view on Satan isn't a matter of not knowing the Bible so well. Luther's views on Satan were formed by the New Testament use of the name, rather than by the rather briefer appearance in Job. Neither example are evidence that Luther didn't know his Bible so well.
Strange he didn't notice while he was translating the Tanak into his native tongue. But I suppose that's why he taught the devils and calamity as God's improper, left handed work.
@@HomeFromFarAway Yes, both the Old Testament and New Testament are comprised of different books with different authors, stitched together by various people with different motivations. Plus there's a healthy dose of repurposed pagan stories to boot. So as you point out, it's riddled with contradictions.
The theology that Holland speaks about here is very far off Luther's actual theology. Luther was all about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. All this talk of the love of God is useless unless it is connected to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I suggest you stick to the history where the strength of this podcast lies.
I know 100% that he believed in the Perpetual Virginity of the All Holy Mother of God, so did Calvin. Sometimes heretics like Luther and Calvin get things right. Ave Maria!
Mein Gott! Feels like I've been waiting for this episode for THIRTY YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Meanwhile, we're over here waiting for the episodes of the Polish Lithuanian Commom Wealth 😅
@@KvltKrist 😂 Don't hold your breath
😂😂😂😂 brilliant
love this podcast. it's the only thing keeping me going atm
💪🏼 keep going bro
I feel that.
Be kind to yourself. Onwards..
Keep keeping on friend. You are loved
Same here. But better days must be ahead, my friend.
Great podcast. I’m loving this series.
Dominion was a great book, I'm looking forward to more on Luther. You should do one on Calvin as well :)
I studied history at University, and came out knowing quite a lot about the French Revolution, Italian and German Unification, the Industrial Revolution. Not much else. The earlier British history I knew really I learned when I was 11, 12, 13, 14. Listening to these podcasts has inspired me to do more reading, and - in retirement - some of the gaps are beginning to fill in. And it's a beautiful feeling when you realise that Ferdinand and Isabella (of Columbus fame) were the parents of Catherine of Aragon, and so the grandparents of Mary I. One day I may even be able to understand what the Holy Roman Empire was.
I think one of the hardest things for a person brought up in a modern nation state (particularly from the UK which is geographically distinct) to understand, is how fluid populations could be. So the Lombards coming from Germany, the Vandals coming from Germany and occupying North Africa, the Normans being refurbished Vikings - it makes us queasy. It's easier to deal with one country at a time. The good thing about following the Rest is History wherever it leads, is that it helps to break down the unease about the complexity of European history. And the more one learns, the easier it becomes to learn more.
Dominic/Tom - You seemed beside yourselves that Luther referred to the giving of alms as menstrual waste but this hyperbole, I believe he was borrowing from the prophet Isaiah who states (in 64:6) that we are all unclean and our righteous acts are as filthy rags. Biblical scholars aver that in this context Isaiah is referring to cloth used for female hygiene, as a woman was considered ceremonially unclean to participate in religious events during her monthly cycle per Levitical Law. So, I would assert Luther's hyperbolic statements are merely him paraphrasing holy scriptures as part of his argument against the concept of works-based salvation.
As a Greek Orthodox Christian I have so enjoyed these sessions. Absolutely brilliant and presented with genius.
And of course we orthodox have been saying some of this since the late middle ages and dawning schism. Of course we see Luther in error ( unbalanced better put) with his seeing the human being as fundamentally evil with all the negatively psychological following " hang ups" this brings. We would say human beings have the possibility of good and evil and the Christian life consists in that struggle as history clearly shows.
Equally we pray for the dead but the rest is up to God's mercy.
Ortodoxy needed a much bigger reformation than the church in the West but once Constaninople fell Orthodoxy is irrevant.
Orthodoxy could do with a little less conflagration with civil authorities. But as something encroached to Eastern Europe, It has become irrelevant. However, thanks to soviet conservatism It Will crumble a bit later than Roman Catolicismo.
Tom Holland here with an endearingly camp take on the already quintessentially camp Martin Luther, brilliantly counterpoised by the effusive and bubbly Mr Sandbrook. All good clean honest-to-God fun... Keep up the good work chaps.
"God loves you, so crack on"...I really needed that today :) Thanks for this excellent podcast.
hilarious
@@FireflyOnTheMoonT Shirt
I don’t know how I found this channel but I’m so glad I did! I love this channel. Please keep having these conversations! Perhaps something on the “Dark Ages”?
“To be alone for Luther is liberating - he is closer to God!” 👏👏👏
Would there be a chance you could ever do a series on piracy. Maybe go through the early stages of piracy in the Caribbean and then to the golden age and then to the eventual fall of the golden age. I think it would be so interesting to hear you talk about.
I second that
So enjoying this series. Charles V is the grandson, not the son, of Emperor Maximilian, btw.
You guys are so great! But could you please number the youtube videos like you do the podcasts so it's easier to find them (and make sure you're listening in sequence for a series)?
Yup. I second that.
Third
One area where I'd disagree with Dominic Sandbrook is that Luther's position on the Bible being innately clarifying was absurd. From our perspective in the 21st century it is, yes, but from the perspective of a believing Christian in the 16th century that takes an omnipotent God who has written his word through his agents on Earth then it doesn't seem absurd to think that he set it up in such a way as its texts would automatically illumine our minds upon reading it given God's power.
It is the same thought as to how the scholastics such as Aquinas thought huge tracts of Christian theological principles could be ascertained by pure logic and Aristotelian metaphysics. Yes, to a 21st century person it seems absurd but to someone who takes it for granted that there was an omnipotent deity that has ordered the universe then the fact he could set it up in such a way that the human mind (which he also created) could comprehend it seems a perfectly reasonable assumption.
I think Sandbrook sees religion in institutional terms - notevhis doubt about whether people actually thought the relics were true - as a form of Burkean conservative glue, and whilst it was that, people did actually genuinely assume its principles in a visceral way that makes the events of these eras impossible to understand otherwise.
Discussing the history of the church without possessing the faith and a deep understanding of scripture can present things from a different light but not necessarily the right perspective from a believer standpoint. Having said that, I’m loving this podcast as well. 😊
this is a history channel
Study and belief are not the same thing. History is not studied with emotion or belief but with objectivity.
@@thelazychefuk4410 We study something to come to believe in it. We have to have faith that what is told is the truth. Not everything in history is verifiable. If we study something and don't believe in it, then whats the point?
Very informative and also funny!
Dominic's idea that those who are saved are morally superior to others is completely back-to-front to the reality experienced by true Christians. The joy of grace that Luther experienced was not because he felt more moral, but that he realised his desperate wickedness but that despite it all, the sacrifice of Christ was sufficient to forgive him both legally and efficaciously.
Oh, glorious day, when Jesus washed my sins away!
My own experience confirms this view.
Luther was a self-righteous egomaniac who definitely thought he was morally superior to others.
@@joejohnson6327 no friend, that is a misunderstanding of the nature of intellectual discourses of those times. Luther was no worse than any other. He just stood firm on the truth of God's conviction on his heart and mind, something very rare in modern Christendom.
you do understand the inherent self-contradiction of your statement? the "no true scottsman"argument while espousing your own moral superiority as a "true christian"
@@HomeFromFarAwayno they don’t see that.
Do you not know that Jesus Christ is IN you.
Luther realized who he was that the grace given by God was himself.
Your own wonderful human Imagination is God.
Luther Experienced the Scriptures as they are truly written.
It is not secular history but Sacred history.
It is the story of everyman.
Every character in the Bible is a State of Conciousness... not a person that walked the earth 2000 years ago.
If you think Jesus is out there somewhere then you do not understand the Bible.
Jesus is the pattern man.
When you awaken from this deadly sleep to who you really are (God) all Imagination you will read the Bible differently.
But you must also begin to understand the true meaning of the words and names used.
The Bible is written so that the ignorant and abusers would not comprehend its deep meaning.
You don't have to be a monk to be close to God.
God is closer than breathing nearer than hands and feet.
What is that?
Your own Imagination.
Without it nothing exists.
I just ordered Dan Brown's Dominion!
1 Tim 3:15...The Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth
Two comments: burning books was first mentioned in the Acts of the apostles in the New testament. Secondly, comparing good works to menstrual filth is a biblical reference to Isaiah 64:6.
I love these men.
just outstanding stuff wow
I tried several times to get the survey but failed. Maybe because not a member, listen on Spotify. If you're reading this can I please make 2 suggestions? A history of the Spanish Civil War and the history of Cuba. I loved the series on Cortez and on Columbus. Brilliant!!
Brilliant episode! I found the comparison between Martin Luther and Jordan Peterson fascinating
An insult to Jordon!
Looking forward to this.
It is more important for Christians now than ever before to study the Bible, science, history, psychology, etc., to understand the universe and our place in the Christian kingdom. Otherwise, individuals can interpret the Bible strangely and establish cults, which is happening (happened) in the USA
It's probably even more imporyant for everyone to directly study cults. We have to study the problem itself
Uh, I think cults appear (have appeared) outside the US .
It starts with courtious debates and propaganda battles. But if anyone told Luther and the bishop how catholic vs protestant "debate" will look like in Germany in 100 years, during the Thirty Year War, everyone would have second thoughts in whether splitting the Church is a good idea or not.
Perhaps the most important principle in engineering is avoiding “single points of failure.” Depending on one monarch for one’s protection would have made me very circumspect!
my favorite star trek episode.
Wow so Luther was nuts😮 . Gee I want to keep following him 😂
This is great. Thanks
wow, Martin Luther... quite fascinating. learned a lot.
Will Production read comments and be forced to reshoot #4?
lol. you are just not that important, or correct
Some of the insights here are so profound. Pivotal. There is a seriousness to this that is far above the level of hype that is creeping into the podcast.
You got a new subscriber! This is so interesting :)
When you are called and actually have the Experiences that an Individual has and at some point we will all go through it... you become unafraid of anything literally.
We are called One by One.
He was Born again.. from above.
When you are born again it actually means being born from above ( in your skull).
You go through an entire process.
The Bible as I have stated is not secular history. It is the story of Salvation.
God is sleeping in every man and will awaken.
This is what Luther discovered.
Everything he says is absolutely true but one has to Experience God to understand.
Once saved always saved. One can kill and sin but always know one goes to heaven!
Yes. That makes complete sense.😂
You keep thinking that, if it gives you comfort
I wish this podcast had been available to view whilst taking my degree I history. Very knowledgeable and informative. Keep up the fine work guys.
PS Any chance of another episode on the 1970s? We have had two so far, on the Heath government and the February 1974 election. Left me in a state of anticipation for more.
The 1970 election exists on youtube in full as broadcast on the day. Quite the eye opener.
31:36 - 32:02 🔥🔥🔥
To hear them compare Luther's rhetoric and Trump's rhetoric, and finding the comparison valid, is absolutely fascinating and crushingly depressing, at the same time.
Luther was a great theologian. Trump had Paula White as a "spiritual advsior" a woman who is a very false teacher.
Printing was a much more labor intensive and expensive process back at that time. Where did Luther get money or influence in his early days to convince the printers to print his bibles, and his original treatises? Did he have a rich patron? Was there an established circle of like minded individuals that included someone with a printing press who had already been predisposed to the same ideas and just waited for someone with a spark?
Amen
Brilliant ! 👏👏
I think people are missing the point when they pretend it only takes accepting the love of God to be saved so therefore you can behave as you like cause you have a “get out of jail free” card anytime. It is not that simple and it is a juvenile interpretation which, yes, people throw in Christians’ faces, but it is not true. Loving God and accepting the love of God means you choose to follow God, which means you desire only good. Sin - doing other than God’s will for your life - is soul crushing if you truly love God. Yes sin is always there and we fall- but we do not want it and we fight it. The deeper you ask for and feel the love of God,the stronger you get in resisting sin. It is not always a pleasant task. Accepting the spirit of God in your heart is becoming one with that spirit and letting it guide you- not choosing for your own sinful self. “Born again” means you are well and truly changed and carry God within you. It’s a phrase that has been cheapened by the commercialism of an often lazy human-led church looking for an easier way with shallow promises… Just like Luther’s take on indulgences!! But it is not an easy truth to follow. Certainly churches are full of sinners and error -but we are called to always look for and resist our nature - with the help of God - no matter where we find it. Where else but church should a sinner come? In Corinthians, Paul says: “God catches the wise in their craftiness … do not be deceived, for all is yours… and you are Christ’s and Christ is God’s. “ Of course - these are only my perspectives in faith. Read and see what you find for yourself.
As a lifelong Lutheran I am aghast - Lol; but I agree with Dominic him changing his last name to assimilate Aluthera is quite telling as did another 1960's rebel:/
John 3:3 - Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." 1 Peter 1:23 - For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.
“Word of God”= Jesus Christ
in order to understand recursion one must first understand recursion
Jesus didn't say anything of the sort. Just to be clear.
I would love some citations throughout this conversation. Hearing things about Luther placing emphasis on a feeling is odd because Luther talked about looking to the cross for assurance to fight his lack of feeling saved. I would also love to hear this talk with a Lutheran scholar and theologian present to push back on these statements. Dr. Jordan B. Cooper comes to mind.
I would point out that "lack of feeling saved" is an emphasis on feeling
So is Luther then the father of enlightenment, this Lutherian way of thinking much more individual and truth seeking. A shift in thinking about your own belief and how you preserve God
Johne Locke, Issac Newton, René Descartes big influencers of the Enlightenment but Voltaire is considered by most as the father of the Enlightenment. Could Luther be the father of enlightenment? Well, the Enlightenment was about human reasoning to explain how the world worked and how man could and should interplay in this world whereas Martin Luther still believed that Christ and faith in Christ as savior and God’s workings explained many things about life, nature, and beyond.
He's the father of herestics.
Luther was a man and therefore flawed. But he was right about the indulgences. It’s like it all went to his head and he started believing his own PR. Sound like most everyone we ever knew? Doesn’t negate where he started though. The indulgences were corruption plain and simple.
I can’t wait to hear Jordan Peterson’s reaction to being compared to Martin Luther 😂
Well, he'd take that as a win, as he's mad as a box of frogs.
I think he'd be flattered.
as a fellow cult leader, he'd pretend to have insightful thoughts while just using it to push his usual agenda. It's a pretty standard script across all of them really
What an insult to Jordon!
both mad as a box of frogs, yes
ATTABOY, LUTHER !!
You need to get the theologian Alister McGrath to talk about Luther's theology of the cross and his doctrine of justification
Jordan Cooper, the young Lutheran theologian here on RUclips would be excellent.
Wouldn't an actual Lutheran be better?
@@j.g.4942 that depends whether you prefer a subjective or academic perspective
@@HomeFromFarAway a fair point, yet I've often found that non-Lutherans emphasis certain parts of Luther's works and thought isolated from the rest.
It's especially easy with him because is not systematic so when taken out of context often contradicts himself.
A good example is Justification, Luther taught that the Christian is united with Christ by God's declaration, thus he takes our death and sin and we receive His righteousness and life, if we remain in Him (rely on Him, or sola fide).
The Luthers I've often found in non-Lutheran academics would struggle to write his catechisms.
When you say theology you mean 'heresy'.
Safe to say that Dan Brown is not a friend of the show.
Did you guys skip Martin Luther's trip to Rome?
Predestination of an elite seems to me a loathsome idea, I am surprised so little is made of that. As a tool of oligarchy it is interesting to contrast it with what is going on today. Back then Luther linked subjectivity and exclusion. Elites today link subjectivity and inclusion. (That driven by Wittgenstein or perhaps his patron Keynes). But anyhow, all attacks on rationality are grist to oligarchical operations. I wonder what Pelagius would have made of Luther? I like to think "unbearable". My own video - looking at money in order to strengthen Gibbon regarding St Augustine & co goes live tonight......
It's standard stuff for all cult leaders. It's an early example but the basic pathology and script still apply to cults now
Removing statues have nothing to do with Martin Luther. Jan Hus had much more to say.
It sounds like luther was mentally unstable
So far I am in a quandry with this video and the portrayal if Luther. This is mainly because I have listened to Lloyd de Jongh on his channel quoting from the works of Luther ( which seem to expose Luther as being rather insane and unsavoury) would welcome some comment on this, or perhaps that is yet to come? ( 27 m into this video now) Apart from that I personally find myself wondering if in the long run Luther's input has virtually destroyed Christianity. I mean this in the light of the emptying and closing churches, is this the result of chaotic doctrines and ultimate free for all, anything goes churches??
Lloyd doesn't seem interested in giving a balanced picture of the views of those he disagrees with. He once did a video on socialism. I commented underneath pointing out that the word is an umbrella term for both marxism and social democracy, rather than just covering marxism and other varieties of communism, and that there is some Christian inspiration for aspects of marxism, and he called me an apologist for genocide. So I think it's likely that Lloyd was quote-mining Luther.
That's not to say that Luther didn't have some unsavory views, but those do come later.
As for Luther's impact, it's worth noting that Luther didn't believe in chaotic doctrines and free-for-all anything goes churches. The writings of the Reformers draw on the writings of the church fathers just as much as the writings of their Roman Catholic contemporaries. And the fact that Christianity (at least as measured by statisticians) is continuing to grow faster than the global population is due in very large part to Protestant missionary activity in Africa, India, China, and other areas of the world. So it is very much premature to suggest that Protestantism will eventually lead to the virtual destruction of Christianity.
-Having read a bit of 16th century theological works, to me most of the writers appear that way to me. I'm not convinced this is special to Martin Luther.
As a student of cult deprogramming and mental health issues, Luther precisely fits the script for a cult leader. his actions, words and world view are cookie cutter stuff
Did he just compare Jordan fing Peterson to Matrin Luther? WTF!
pretty accurate. having studied cults and mental health for a few decades it's impossible to miss the cookie-cutter personality tropes
both mad as a box of frogs
I find this conversation very condescending, it's obsessed with using "presentisms". Do they have to frame everything in terms of contemporary tropes?
yes. He is making history accessible to modern day listeners. The channel uses humour. If you feel the channel is just not arch enough for you, I'm sure you will be missed.
It's very sad that some circles chucked out religion hundreds of years ago and others are still living in such benighted delusion.
I for one have not chucked out my faith and am blissful in living in my non benighted delusion, thank you very much.
Did the church need a wake up call?
The beginning of the end of the church. phew
The obsession with the movement of the bowels - or its results, rather - still very much is a thing for German speakers to this day. Maybe something that can also be chalked up to Luther who has coined quite a few German proverbs and expressions that are in use to date.
The guy was a heretic, what can one expect?
You better do the story of when Martin marries Katharina. The letters are hilarious!
The burning of the bull is defying the church and that is defying God since Christ told Peter "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). He took matters into his own hands and the rest about Protestantism is historically bad for the church. There is a better way to deal with the situation without having to break up the church as far as he is concerned.
So sad that Tom Holland failed to read the most accurate theological/spiritual account of Luther’s journey, the Historical and Theological Introduction (65 pages) of Luther’s MAGNUM OPUS…The Bondage of the Will. “From 1517 onwards, the relationship between Erasmus (the Pope’s ‘hit man,’ hired to intellectually assassinate Luther) and Luther was a matter of great interest and speculation to men of letters, theologians, bishops and princes. As early as 1502 in his ENCHIRIDION Erasmus had declared his distaste for dogmatic theology, and Luther was above all a (radical) theologian.”
I don’t think they care enough about it to do that haha. This is quite a casual history podcast
They are historians not theologians
@@sarawoods1450 well they did explain what Luther’s ideology was, although they got it completely wrong haha
Would be interesting to contrast what Luther believed and the Orthodox Church .
I'm Orthodox and speaking only for myself! I consider Luther the prince of heretics as well as being vulgar and someone who placed himself ABOVE the Bible, he wanted some books removed and altered one of St Paul's comments on Faith to change the meaning.
These shows are riddled with pointless personal political options or irrelevant comparisons. They will age like milk as people wont even care about the current political figures. Why not just start a politics podcast and drop the "history" veneer?
Biographies are an effective way to do history
I love your podcasts and enjoy hearing your perspective on Luther but you guys need someone whose expertise is theology and Church history to help inform your comments on this because parts of your narrative and some of your claims are inaccurate, and at times even somewhat slanderous.
Do you have some specific examples? Generalities aren't very informative. Thanks,
they really don't need to apologies for slander. They are historians ffs
The comment about menstrual filth being likened to good works comes from the Bible " Your good works are like filthy rags" Isaiah 64:6
But taken OUT OF CONTEXT by the heretic Luther.
RIP Martin Luther you would have loved reddit
I find it ludicrous to compare Luther to Peterson who is so pro establishment. Not to say that anti-colonial scholars are actually anti-establishment, but it is still a fresher idea with more mileage in it than lobsters and room-cleaning. History will decide, Peterson is a joker.
they didn't say they were the same. Jus that they were both professors and nuts.
“The little foxes” metaphor is from the book of Proverbs.
Not today, Satan
It seems that protestant Christianity taken to its logical conclusion, turns into secular liberalism.
that's what they said
I get what you guys are trying ro say but comparing Luther to Jordan Peterson is crazy to me 😂
Luther essentially cames acoss as quite an unpleasent person to say the least.
Luther's notion of sola fide is a misreading of Paul, contradicts the words of Christ in the Synoptics and John, and inevitably leads to presumption. If Luther was corned about _sola fide_ then how do we make sense of Paul's words elsewhere in his letters: "work out your salvation in fear and trembling"? James clearly contradicts it: "... salvation is not by faith alone". Christ talks about the importance of works over and over again. Luther is just flat out wrong.
The “certitude” of Luther originates from 1) Scripture, primarily the NT and the Apostle Paul (1 Cor. 2:6-16) and 2) the fact of having been born-again (regenerated) by God the Holy Spirit. It takes both to resolve the epistemological questions of TRUTH vs error. 2 Timothy 1:7 “For God did not give us a Spirit of fear but of power and love and A RESOLUTE MIND.” Will Tom Holland see this spiritual/ theological critical axiom?
It is a critical axiom. And it’s becoming more and more critical every day as the Catholic Church seems to be now fully committed to proving Luther correct
I've been reading these apoplectic comments waiting to see if cognitive decline would result in random all-caps. 😅 I am not disappointed😂
I love this series on Luther but all this had been thought of before! By a woman who was burnt at the stake in 1310. All the theology you speak of is right there in Marguerite Porete's book (which survived her death) The Mirror of Simple Souls.
I have watched all of the episodes in this series about Martin Luther and one thing that i have noticed was their constant sniggering at , and taking the piss out of , Luther and other people for the way they spoke and the language they used . I have a question for them both : would they talk and react that way if it was a giant of the world of " peacefulness " that they were discussing ? Would they be laughing and taking the piss like they did in this? And we all know the answer : a massive never in a million years . The question then remains , why not ? What are they afraid of ? Who are they afraid of ? And why ? Where is all their investigatory independance ? Two-tier hypocrisy is not just restricted to the police , politicians and the judiciary . It is alive and absolutely thriving in this series . How discriminatory and unjust .
What Luther is doing is exactly what Adam did and that was to decide for himself what is good and evil outside of church authority I.e. God’s authority. If he did it constructively within the church, it won’t be adversarial, it would have a more positive outcome.
So, selling Indulgences is something a Christian Pastor should be happy about? Should Herr Dr. Luther have pretended he didn't know the basic Christian Faith to please the Pope of Rome? Christianity is a Public Faith and not a Secret Gnostic Faith it's content is known and should be believed and Practiced even if this is frowned upon by the Pope of Rome and his Cardinals and other Officials.
@@adolphCat As I've mentioned, voicing out against something you think is wrong is the right thing to do, but one must not do it by tearing down part of the church and cause disunity. The pope is ordained by God, and he will face God himself, the rest of us must do things with the right conscience for the right purpose without causing schism in the church. This order was instructed by Christ and we must obey both; that is to voice out without having schismatic intention.
@@leoteng1640 It seems your idea is that Herr Dr. Luther and the German Princes should have asked permission of the Pope to outlaw the sale of Indulgences in Germany and if the Pope gave them permission to do this they should have been happy and they should not have much concern if the sale of Indulgences continued in Italy and other places. If the Pope refused to give them permission to abolish the sale of Indulgences in their Territories they should have let the issue go, as a future Pope might give this permission after St. Peter's Basilica was built and finances were doing better and the need for German money was not urgently needed. The most important thing is Church Unity and not submission of the Church in part or as a whole to Christ. Unity and not Obedience to God is the main concern of Christ for the People of God. Unity of the Whole Church is more important than Living a particularly Christian Lifestyle or adapting a deep Christian Spirituality by any part of the Church.
University Professors, Theologians, sould forget the Faith they studied all the years and certainly not teach the Laity the Faith if this will cause a rift in Church Unity or bring trouble to policies, finances, or politics of the Pope. Unity is the main Reason for the Church and not reconciliation of sinful Humanity with God or Communion with God in Christ.
FEW ARE AS INTOLERANT AS THE STUDENT WHO BELIEVES HE IS RIGHT
He was as close to evil as a religious zealot could be.
Prayer ...alms giving ...fasting...the 3 main parts of the Christian life
Comparing good deeds to menstrual filth is a direct quotation from the bible.
and TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT!
Love your vids.
But these intros.... "Do you
..?" That you've started doing are weird. Please stop them.
Quite a lot of people like them
Great narrative, pretty shaky theology.
Luther didn't want to dismantle the Church, and his ideas weren't as individualistic as you claim. He didn't champion feeling, but rather the objective promise of Scripture. He said you should take comfort in the promise of salvation, but not that your salvation was implicated by the strength of that comfort. He would definitely disagree with the idea that your faith was something to be hashed out between you and God alone.
One of these two gents looks slightly AI generated. Won’t say which. But he has hair.
Luther as Donald Trump - Love it
The madness of religion. Dune Part 2
I wish there could be the equivalent of a modern day Marin Luther who could drive a stake in to the heart of ALL religious lunacy whether christian or Jew or Islam or Hindu or.... As a species we have advanced WAY beyond that type of ignorant, provincial "thinking" that still infects us to this moment.
problem is that cult leaders like luther do exist today. it rarely goes well. My hope is that culture leans more heavily into rationality and we don't just terminate the species via idology
amen
Sorry Tom, sacramental Baptism doesn’t “give” the “new birth.” That was the Catholic DOGMA Luther saw as error. Baptism commemorates the born-again event in a genuine Christian’s experience. Are you drawing on someone’s Anglican/Church of England past?
"Born again of water and the Spirit" ?
@@mistymoor7114 The grammatical construction in John 3:3-8 contrast the natural (“flesh”-v.6) and the supernatural, our watery birth from a woman’s womb (v.4) with the supernatural/metaphysical “birth from above or beyond” (vv.3 &7). There is no mention of “baptism” until later, v.22 and this Jewish activity has nothing to do with sacramentalism.
This point sounds like the classic Baptist Sermon. Zaccheus in the Tree. Zaccheus out the tree. Thirdly, a brief word on Baptism.
@@karlernstbuddenbrock371 Hardly. CLASSIC would be 2 hours minimum. And what in the world does a short, wealthy tax collector sitting in a tree have to do with ANYTHING in THIS conversation??
@@DanSme1 precisely. I rest my case. You guys squeeze adult baptism into everything.
Luther didn't know his Bible so well. The book of James says that Faith without works is dead. Also, in the Old Testament Satan is basically an employee or flunky of Yahweh. It isn't until the New Testament that this concept of Satan as an evil being comes into play.
If you read that verse from James in context, it seems to be saying that faith that does not produce works is dead, rather than that faith needs works added to it (it goes on to say that I will show you my faith by my workds). This is perfectly compatible with Luther's theology. He came to regard the book as an epistle of straw because of that passage, but it is an extremely common pattern in church history for a person or movement to react against one (perceived) error by going too far in the opposite direction, and his view on James is an obvious example of this. His view on Satan isn't a matter of not knowing the Bible so well. Luther's views on Satan were formed by the New Testament use of the name, rather than by the rather briefer appearance in Job. Neither example are evidence that Luther didn't know his Bible so well.
Strange he didn't notice while he was translating the Tanak into his native tongue.
But I suppose that's why he taught the devils and calamity as God's improper, left handed work.
cult leaders reliably cherry-pick their ideologies. A book like the bible contradicts itself enough to be a perfect foil
@@HomeFromFarAway Yes, both the Old Testament and New Testament are comprised of different books with different authors, stitched together by various people with different motivations. Plus there's a healthy dose of repurposed pagan stories to boot. So as you point out, it's riddled with contradictions.
The theology that Holland speaks about here is very far off Luther's actual theology. Luther was all about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. All this talk of the love of God is useless unless it is connected to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I suggest you stick to the history where the strength of this podcast lies.
Please please please. Charles V is Maximilian's grandson, not son. You have the hideous Phillip the Handsome in between...
Hmm. The more I hear about Martin Luther, the more he seems like the anti-hero of the piece...
The Trumpian echoes are VERY disconcerting!
What would Luther have thought of the Assumption, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and Vatican One? Did he predict this further descent into apostasy?
I know 100% that he believed in the Perpetual Virginity of the All Holy Mother of God, so did Calvin. Sometimes heretics like Luther and Calvin get things right.
Ave Maria!
Luther sounds like Lucifer 😐